iwc xvi vs omega speedmaster moon vs Rolex Explorer I

[time]

Hi, all.

IWC xvi vs omega speedmaster moon vs Rolex Explorer I...
which one would you go for?

Those three are more or less in the same price level.
All are great watches.

Difficult for me to select one of them?

[arkwhaler]

all are great watches. depends on what you want, as i could not place explorer and speedmaster even loosely in the same category. is this gonna be a legacy watch for you or are you planning to flip it in the future?

try them all and pick what you like the best.

[karmatp]

Speedy for me.

[Welshwatchman]

The Speedmaster is the one I would opt for though I would expect to get one for almost half the price of an Explorer I.

[Tools]

That's an interesting conundrum..

the Speedy and the IWC could be had heavily discounted, so they are not really in the same price range..

The watches are so different and so I don't know what you are really looking for..

On this Board, I would say Speedy, even though you have to wind it every day..

If you ask me on the Rolex Board, I would say Explorer.. Automatic, trouble free, high value retention.

[SubmarinerMan]

Definitely the Speedy!

[time]

Hello. Thanks for reply.

I do not choose my watches "in the same category" - I choose my watches based on my feeling of them, their nice design and their "finish vs price" value.

I haven`t seen the moonwatch 3750.00 and the classic version of XVI at ADs for a while... however, I can see Explorer I at ADs where I live.

How much discount can I get for those three? 15% for rolex and 20% for iwc and omega??? I did get 13% for my sub date earlier, 2 years ago....

[arkwhaler]

in the us probably 30% for omega. unsure about iwc. 15-20% for rolex right now. (plus tax)

[WJGESQ]

Speedmaster By Far. Explore is DULL.

[blackmsport]

Speedmaster is a very nice watch very collectable too if you can get a speedmaster schumacher

[Dalton]

Speedy for sure. The other two would be out of the same price range.

[Ken Cox]

Timezone gives a very negative review of the Rolex Explorer I, suggesting it should sell in the $800 range:

http://www.timezone.com/library/horo...horologium0036

I greatly prefer the aesthetics of the IWC XVI over the Explorer I.

That said, I greatly prefer the aesthetics of the Speedmaster Pro over the IWC XVI.

After reading several technical reviews of all three watches, the IWC XVI seems the higher quality watch, with the Speedmaster second and the Explorer third.

In my mind, the Speedmaster has a significant edge on the IWC XVI on the basis of its chronograph complication, aesthetics and history.

[rdrzman]

Wow, I did not know Rolex made such a crappy watch, I wonder if the same close inspection of other up to date movements would show some of the same issues.

Onega Speedy would be my choice, it has complications, it is timeless in design and has a history!

I will admit that I have no clue why Rolex charges so much for their watches and so much for service in the first place, they are mass produced and not unique in any way... and to see quality of this level... I can only say FRAUD in the marking of this as a up class luxury product... I call SCAM.

As for the automatic issue, I think Bill Cosby said it best when he was late to a Larry King episode and gave the excuse that his watch needed winding and the result of his late arrival "I do not want to own anything that does not need me" . A manual watch needs you, it takes interaction with you in order to serve you and not just a piece of heavy jewelry one puts on in the morning and tosses on the night stand in the evening.

Farel

[arkwhaler]

Originally Posted by Ken Cox

Timezone gives a very negative review of the Rolex Explorer I, suggesting it should sell in the $800 range:

http://www.timezone.com/library/horo...horologium0036

I greatly prefer the aesthetics of the IWC XVI over the Explorer I.

That said, I greatly prefer the aesthetics of the Speedmaster Pro over the IWC XVI.

After reading several technical reviews of all three watches, the IWC XVI seems the higher quality watch, with the Speedmaster second and the Explorer third.

In my mind, the Speedmaster has a significant edge on the IWC XVI on the basis of its chronograph complication, aesthetics and history.

well the explorer has essentially the same movement as most current production rolexes. exactly the same as op, nd sub, and milgauss (maybe has the new hairspring?) and the same with added date complication all the datejusts subs and seadwellers. if the movement is that bad it is that bad for essentially all rolex. i would still wager the rolex keeps as good or better time (even odets agreed on this) and will retain more value.

[hflee55]

speedy for me.

[C. Davidson]

Id go for the Exp I.

[jdc]

[QUOTE=Ken Cox;1167083]Timezone gives a very negative review of the Rolex Explorer I, suggesting it should sell in the $800 range:

http://www.timezone.com/library/horo...horologium0036

actually I think that the review was a bit of a setup by the then editor of Timezone to get a reaction against Rolex. The reviewer was used to seeing very high end handmade watches and his views should be taken in that context

I would choose a speedy

[DaveInLA]

I have both the Explorer I as well as the Speedy Pro 3570.50.

The Speedy is definitely the more intriguing watch with its history, appearance, and handwound movement. I like looking at it.

But the Explorer is probably my favorite watch. It's not terribly attractive when I just look at it on my drawer, but when I strap it on, it just feels right. I've got a small wrist, and I love this watch. It's perfect for me.

[Watchdog]

Speedy for me

[14060man]

I love the look of the vintage Explorer 1s with matte dial and lume applied directly to the dial surface.

But in the 1980s Rolex "blinged the dial" of the Explorer 1. As a result the font of the 3,6,9 numerals changed. Looks cheesy now with the new bizarre font. The sparkly white gold hour surrounds and high gloss dial give this legendary tool watch a diluted, effeminate "blingy" appearance, IMO.

If you have an average size 7 inch wrist or larger, the Explorer I may look a wee bit small.

The Speedmaster is classic and retains its understated looks -- with zero pretension. Matte dial. Plastic crystal. And a perfect size for the average male wrist of 7 inches or more.

It's one of the few Omega's I would consider as I generally prefer Rolexes.

But this is no competition. Speedmaster smokes the Rolex. In fact the rugged Speedy blew away Rolex and Breitling in NASA's 1960s testing trials, proving more reliable and better constructed.

[dkpw]

Originally Posted by Welshwatchman

The Speedmaster is the one I would opt for though I would expect to get one for almost half the price of an Explorer I.

You said it, Paul.

[presario]

Speedmaster Pro for me.

[vapalux]

Speedy pro for me

Si

[Robertf]

Another vote for the speedmaster

[cody p]

i love all 3, but i'd go with the iwc. a little less ubiquitous than the other two imo. of course, ask tomorrow and i might have a diff answer.

[macstiltskin]

Speedy . Even though I own one I still cannot walk past an AD without looking at the Speedmaster on display.

[KtownGreg]

Both have long histories. I find them to be completely different and complementary watches.

The ExpI is an understated classic capable of fitting most situations (no tux). Some may say it is too small. It's simple dial and size lend to an "under the radar" timepiece.

The Speedy is an elegant classic which (with hesalite) has a warm glow reflecting its history (both Omega's and mine). The Speedy lacks water resistance. The Speedy offers a bit more variety with straps (leather, nato, bracelet). I feel the ExpI looks best on the oyster bracelet.

In the end, it's up to the owner. Try each on. Good luck.

Ktown